Re: Scribus vs ConTeXt

[Kip Warner <kip@thevertigo.com>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1227 bytes --]

On Wed, 2012-02-29 at 11:29 -0500, William Adams wrote:
> With a graphical tool, one is limited to the automation which the developers are willing to build into the tool and sentenced to handling manually _everything_ else, _every_ time that there's a change, e.g., if you have a keyword block on your opening article pages aligned against the outside gutter and the layout program can't place it automatically and contextually, then _every_ time the article changes from opening to a left to a right or vice-versa one has to make that change manually.
> 
> I wrote up a longer comparison once upon a time --- Scribus isn't that much different from InDesign and Quark, so the criticism holds:
> 
> While I'm no TeX wizard, I prefer it because it allows one to off-load
> some of the tedium and repetitiveness to the computer, as opposed to
> repeatedly solving variations of the same problems by hand time after
> time after time.
> 
> So,

Superb coverage Will and I appreciate the philosophical approach. I
think Hans et al should maybe consider adding your description to the
wiki somewhere suitable.

-- 
Kip Warner -- Software Engineer
OpenPGP encrypted/signed mail preferred
http://www.thevertigo.com

[-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 485 bytes --]

___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________